Satpal Singh @ Mannu And ORS v. State Of Punjab

In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Decision:- 24.8.2021 Satpal Singh @ Mannu and others .... Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Mr. Amit Arora, Advocate, for the petitioners No.1 and 4.

Mr. Ajay Pal Singh Gill, DAG, Punjab, assisted by SI Kewal Singh.

(Proceedings conducted through video conferencing) ***** GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J . (Oral) 1.

Petitioners No.1 and 4 namely Satpal Singh @ Mannu and Gurmeet Singh seek grant of anticipatory bail in respect of a case registered against him vide FIR No. 39, dated 8.7.2019, Police Station Verowal, District Tarn Taran, under Sections 323, 324, 342, 506, 148, 149 IPC (Sections 363, 365 and 379 IPC added later on). 2.

The FIR in question was lodged at the instance of Charan Singh wherein it is alleged that on 20.6.2019, he was attacked by Satpal Singh @ Mannu, Dilbagh Singh @ Bago, Mehnga Singh, Dilbagh Singh's brother-in-law along with 15 unknown persons. While Satpal

- 2 - Singh is alleged to have given a blow with 'datar' from its reverse side on the right foot of the complainant hitting a finger next to thumb, Dilbag Singh's brother-in-law i.e. Gurmeet Singh is alleged to have given a blow with a 'stick' hitting the complainant on his right shoulder.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there has been long history of litigation amongst the parties and that the complainant has been involving the petitioners in false FIRs. It has further been submitted that in any case the only injury attributed to petitioner Satpal Singh @ Mannu is from the reverse side of a 'datar' and that too on a non-vital part while the other petitioner Gurmeet Singh has been attributed a blow with a 'stick' only.

4.

Opposing the petition, learned State counsel has submitted that since the injury attributed to Satpal Singh @ Manu has been opined to be a grievous injury, no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out. Learned State counsel has however, informed that pursuant to interim directions the petitioners have since joined investigation and that their custodial interrogation is not required. 5.

I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court. 6.

Having regard to the nature of allegations and the fact that it is a case where grievous injury caused to the complainant with the help of a 'datar' on his foot from its reverse side is attributed to petitioner No.1 and simple injury is attributed to petitioner Gurmeet Singh, who have both joined investigation and are not stated to be required for custodial interrogation, the petition is accepted and interim directions

- 3 - issued by this Court vide order dated 20.1.2020 are hereby made absolute subject to the condition that the petitioners No.1 and 4 shall join investigation as and when called upon to do so and cooperate with the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.

24.8.2021 (GURVINDER SINGH GILL) Mohan JUDGE Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No